Posted!

Join the Conversation

Comments

This conversation is moderated according to USA TODAY's
community rules.
Please read the rules before joining the discussion.

OPINION

The role of the federal government

Chris Stewart
Published 5:18 p.m. MT Oct. 20, 2014

CLOSE

Buy Photo

Congressman Chris Stewart says: “When we’re talking about matters that lie outside those few areas that constitutionally belong to the federal government, we should leave it to the states. It may take longer, but the outcomes will be more effective, longer lasting, and more affordable.” In this photo, Stewart takes a moment to talk about some of the issues he will addressed at the congressional debate on Sept. 25.
(Photo:
Asher Swan / The Spectrum & Daily News
)Buy Photo

Republicans tend to prefer a limited federal government and Democrats a larger, more active federal government. Those conflicting fundamental views drive the two parties’ differing approaches to complex policy problems. In short, the role of the Federal government should be strictly limited, both because the Constitution says so, and because it’s better policy. The federal government should do a very few jobs and do those few jobs very well.

So what are those few jobs? First, there is no duty more explicitly delegated to the federal government than to “provide for the common defense.” The founders recognized that national security wasn’t a responsibility the states could shoulder acting individually. Likewise, the other responsibilities enumerated in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution — pay the debts, regulate commerce between states and other nations, coin money, and a few others—were and are powers that made more sense to assign to a central government.

Perhaps the most important feature of that list is that it’s short. It was intended to be short. James Madison in Federalist 45 explained the concept of federalism—“The powers delegated ... to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”

This vertical sharing of powers between the state and federal governments is a critical part of our system, but it’s unfortunately been ignored for many years. The federal government has managed to expand its role, often through clever use of the interstate commerce clause, the appropriations power and the taxing power, and the willingness of states to trade their sovereignty for federal dollars. I’m confident the drafters of the Constitution would be horrified at the behemoth we call the federal government. Not only is it involved in areas they never envisioned, including education, health care, workplace safety and housing, but it doesn’t do those things very well. In fact, the federal government often makes situations worse, at great expense to the taxpayer.

At its root I think much of Americans’ frustration with President Obama is that he seems reluctant to engage in the federal government’s most important role — national security — to instead pursue goals that aren’t remotely the federal government’s business, like Obamacare. The dangerous and historic downsizing of our military under President Obama has coincided with unprecedented incursions into areas of our society best left to local governance or to the private sector. It’s a hazardous upending of the system of federalism our founders intended for keeping policy-making, wherever possible, closest to the people.

What is the solution? We need to stop viewing the federal government, with its vast resources and power, as the quickest and simplest solution to complex problems. This tendency to turn to the federal government is usually well-intentioned but always a mistake. The Nobel-prize winning economist Friedrich Hayek wisely taught, “We shall never prevent the abuse of power if we are not prepared to limit power in a way which occasionally may prevent its use for desirable purposes.” When we’re talking about matters that lie outside those few areas that constitutionally belong to the federal government, we should leave it to the states. It may take longer, but the outcomes will be more effective, longer lasting and more affordable.

Congressman Chris Stewart represents Utah’s 2nd Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives.

Read or Share this story: http://www.thespectrum.com/story/opinion/2014/10/20/role-federal-government/17637533/